Münchhausen trilemma
E829818
The Münchhausen trilemma is a philosophical argument about the impossibility of providing a certain, ultimate justification for any truth claim, since all justifications end in infinite regress, circular reasoning, or arbitrary axioms.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Münchhausen trilemma canonical | 2 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T9919987 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Münchhausen trilemma Context triple: [Hans Albert, knownFor, Münchhausen trilemma]
-
A.
Hempel's paradox
Hempel's paradox is a famous problem in the philosophy of science that challenges our intuitions about confirmation by showing how evidence seemingly unrelated to a hypothesis can still count as confirming it.
-
B.
Epimenides paradox
The Epimenides paradox is a classic self-referential logical puzzle arising from a Cretan philosopher’s claim that all Cretans are liars, illustrating the problem of statements that refer to their own truth or falsehood.
-
C.
Grelling–Nelson paradox
The Grelling–Nelson paradox is a self-referential logical paradox arising from classifying adjectives as "autological" or "heterological," leading to a contradiction when considering whether "heterological" describes itself.
-
D.
Curry paradox
Curry paradox is a self-referential logical paradox that arises in certain formal systems without using negation, showing how naive reasoning about implication and self-reference can lead to triviality.
-
E.
Yablo's paradox
Yablo's paradox is a self-referential logical paradox involving an infinite sequence of sentences, each saying that all later sentences in the sequence are false, which challenges traditional notions of semantic paradox and self-reference.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Münchhausen trilemma Target entity description: The Münchhausen trilemma is a philosophical argument about the impossibility of providing a certain, ultimate justification for any truth claim, since all justifications end in infinite regress, circular reasoning, or arbitrary axioms.
-
A.
Hempel's paradox
Hempel's paradox is a famous problem in the philosophy of science that challenges our intuitions about confirmation by showing how evidence seemingly unrelated to a hypothesis can still count as confirming it.
-
B.
Epimenides paradox
The Epimenides paradox is a classic self-referential logical puzzle arising from a Cretan philosopher’s claim that all Cretans are liars, illustrating the problem of statements that refer to their own truth or falsehood.
-
C.
Grelling–Nelson paradox
The Grelling–Nelson paradox is a self-referential logical paradox arising from classifying adjectives as "autological" or "heterological," leading to a contradiction when considering whether "heterological" describes itself.
-
D.
Curry paradox
Curry paradox is a self-referential logical paradox that arises in certain formal systems without using negation, showing how naive reasoning about implication and self-reference can lead to triviality.
-
E.
Yablo's paradox
Yablo's paradox is a self-referential logical paradox involving an infinite sequence of sentences, each saying that all later sentences in the sequence are false, which challenges traditional notions of semantic paradox and self-reference.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
epistemological problem
ⓘ
philosophical argument ⓘ trilemma ⓘ |
| addresses |
limits of rational justification
ⓘ
problem of ultimate justification ⓘ structure of epistemic justification ⓘ |
| alsoKnownAs | Agrippa’s trilemma NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
everyday empirical beliefs
ⓘ
mathematical axioms ⓘ metaphysical claims ⓘ moral claims ⓘ scientific theories ⓘ |
| associatedWith | Hans Albert NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| conclusion | foundational certainty for knowledge claims cannot be achieved by justification alone ⓘ |
| coreClaim | no ultimate, certain justification for any truth claim is possible ⓘ |
| critiquedBy |
coherentists
ⓘ
foundationalists ⓘ infinitists ⓘ |
| field |
epistemology
ⓘ
theory of justification ⓘ |
| implication | all systems of justification rest on unproven assumptions, circularity, or regress ⓘ |
| influencedBy |
Agrippa’s five modes
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
ancient Pyrrhonian skepticism ⓘ |
| influences |
anti-foundationalist positions
ⓘ
critical rationalism ⓘ fallibilism ⓘ |
| logicalForm | trilemma with three exhaustive and problematic alternatives ⓘ |
| namedAfter | Baron Münchhausen NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| option1 | infinite regress of justifications ⓘ |
| option2 | circular reasoning ⓘ |
| option3 | arbitrary stopping point or dogmatic axiom ⓘ |
| presupposes | that justification must terminate or continue ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
axiomatic systems
ⓘ
basic beliefs ⓘ epistemic circularity ⓘ regress problem ⓘ self-referential justification ⓘ |
| relevantTo |
coherentism
ⓘ
foundationalism ⓘ infinitism ⓘ metaphilosophy ⓘ philosophy of science ⓘ skepticism ⓘ |
| statesThat | every attempt to justify a belief leads to one of three unsatisfactory options ⓘ |
| supportsView |
that justification is structurally problematic
ⓘ
that knowledge is at best fallible ⓘ |
| usedInArgumentAgainst |
foundationalism
ⓘ
the possibility of absolute justification ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Münchhausen trilemma Description of subject: The Münchhausen trilemma is a philosophical argument about the impossibility of providing a certain, ultimate justification for any truth claim, since all justifications end in infinite regress, circular reasoning, or arbitrary axioms.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.